Of course the news that the Israeli offensive wasn’t actually as awful as was initially claimed will get little news play, but it is still worth noting.
That last bit is especially troublesome.
I’m militantly unsurprised.
-XT
No particular thoughts on this story except that it hardly changes the broad picture of massive civilian suffering caused by the Israeli attack. As for this, is it really unusual for organizations to instruct their employees not to talk to the media about a controversial issue? I find it a lot less troubling than the Israeli media blockade during the attack.
Really?
A false report about a UN school being bombed, which was widely used as “proof” that the IDF was not making efforts to minimize civilain harm as much as possible (given the military targets’ locations) and with witnesses told to stay quiet about the fact that the report was false is less troubling than keeping outsiders from coming in during an active conflict?
That’s an interesting POV. It says much about where you are coming from.
Raise your hand if you expected the effects of the Israeli offensive to be misrepresented by the media and the UN to demonize Israel.
/raise hand
And it shows where *you *come from that you’d automatically assume the UN report was fabricated with an agenda, rather than rumors getting mistaken for data somewhere down the line, or that people not noticing the mistake and not caring to investigate the claim were “told to stay quiet about it”. 
Aren’t you making a whole lot of assumptions about what happened exactly; about a story we don’t know that much about. Even if this story is accurate there is nothing to suggest that the woman was told to stay quiet about the falsehood of the report. Once again is it that unusual for an organization involved in a controversial story to instruct its employees not to talk to the media?
Kobal, where did I assume an agenda? Merely the facts as now presented: there was no bombing of the compound; the UN now admits that those of the “seperate branch” of the UN who said there was were telling an untruth; witnesses to the facts were told to be quiet about it by UN officials; and UN officials only backtracking after independent sources had solid evidence that the story was false.
You draw your conclusions from that on your own.
From the Haaretz story:
Frankly it sounds like a standard fog of war incident rather than some sinister anti-Israel conspiracy. And if Israel had allowed journalists into Gaza there would have been much more accurate information about what exactly happened.
Yeah, I read the Globe and Mail article but decided not to start a thread about it. I mean… come on Jake, it’s the UN.
Err, there’s nothing about anyone being told to be quiet about anything in your article. Considering your OP line about “of course the media won’t talk much about it”, I’d say you are um… somewhat less than impartial and unbiased about the whole deal 
The G&M article.
I think that some papers in the early confusion of the attack reported erroneously, and then those reports were picked up by others and so on. Some papers correctly identified what happened, for example:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/06/africa/mideast.php
http://cbs5.com/national/israel.hamas.conflict.2.900871.html
There were other incidents in which ordinance landed inside schools on that day, if I read my googling correct. It seems that this attack got lumped in with the others. Plus, you have to consider that Israel claimed that militants had fired from inside the school. That statement implicitly, even if not intentionally, confirms that the mortars landed in the school. In short, this was a case of sloppy reporting in the fog of war, not intentional lying. Unfortunately, people have agendas and they will siezethis minor discrepancy to discredit as many of their perceived opponents as possible.
Really, what’s the big difference? Is it now ok that 46 civilians, many of them children, were killed because it happened in the street instead of the school?
Look, the plain fact is that you can’t trust any “news report” coming from just about anyone in the Middle East. Israel is a lot more trustworthy, but they are pretty no-nonsense and don’t really want reporters hanging out in combat zones. That doesn’t mean they want to hurt civilians, but thems the breaks; it’s war. Most other nations/terrorists/guerrillas around there are extremely duplicitous and will do anything to get good press. Including fabricating whole events with fake footage (both Hamas and Hezbollah use this frequently).
Um, must have skipped that line. My mistake. Still, “not to talk to the media”. Not “not to talk to the media about this”. Same goes for the G&M article : “The UNRWA has told its staff not to talk to the media”. That’s generic and, furthermore, sensible : no comments to the press. i.e. “We don’t take sides”. That’s a pretty common “governmental” directive, isn’t it ?
IMNSHO that’s another proposition entirely from “Don’t talk about the bullshit we’re making up about this incident to smear Israel”. Besides, it’s not like “the UN” is a person. I can totally picture a manager or official trying to cover his ass. And besides, while your article does state “the school wasn’t attacked”, it does say that the 42 innocents dead figure is legit, and they were killed right outside. Considering the imprecision of mortars, I’d say that it leaves the question of whether Israel really did take all possible precautions in its invasion on the table.
I’m sure the UN was too busy drafting resolutions condeming the repeated attacks on Israel from Gaza to spend time setting the record straight.
Just out of curiousity but have there been any major condemnations of Hamas opening fire on Israeli troops from the vicinity of schools,hospitals,aid convoys etc.or of using their own civilian population to hide amongst when engaging the I.D.F.?
Just thought I’d ask as the media seems to have been very quiet on this subject.
One: they are the bad guys. We expect them to be savages but expect better of Israel because it makes a big noise about how humane it is while still somehow managing to kill hundreds of kids.
Two: EU Official condemns HAMAS
Human Rights Watch (from previous attack)
Hamas War Crimes (Dershowitz in the LA Times)